Trading on Up

*Country* · #1 (**permalink**) -19-01-2007

I wanted to gage everyones interest in trading up in the draft this year. Their are a couple of reasons that I think tis is nessacery to do.

1. Over the last two drafts that Rams have had more picks then any other team in the NFL. The Rams are not desperate for a lot of young talent.

2. The position the Rams are weakest at is DL. No one can argue that fact and in my opinion their are 3 elite DL prospects in this draft, no of which will last to pick 13.

The Rams need someone to come out of the first round an dhave an immediate impact on the defense. To me DT Alan Branch, DE Jamaal Anderson and DE Gaines Adams are the only guys who will do this. So is it worth it for the Rams to move up and target one of these guys?

To go from 13 to 8 would cost us a 3rd round pick.

*Revelstoke* · #2 (**permalink**) -19-01-2007

I'm all for moving up assuming things work out and we do get one of these three guys.

Is Butlers value enough to move him with our first to hang on to that third round pick?

We all know hes not comming back, this could be a good way to move him.

**AvengerRam** · #3 (**permalink**) -19-01-2007

To trade up from 13 to 8 would cost a more than a third round pick. While the Rams only received a third round pick from Denver last year when they swapped the #11 and #15 picks, that was only a move of four spots and, more importantly, didn't involve a move into the top 10 spots.

I think it would cost a second round pick to make that move, and that would be too much. Better to get two players and hope that the second rounder is the next DeMeco Ryans or Lofa Tatupu.

**Nick** · #4 (**permalink**) -19-01-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Country

To go from 13 to 8 would cost us a 3rd round pick.

No, it would cost us more than just a third. The difference in value between the 8th overall pick and the 13th overall pick is 250 points. Our third rounder is worth only 175; the difference Houston would be giving up is 75 points.

There's no way that Houston trades down from eighth overall while giving up that kind of value in the process. Even if you add our fourth rounder, the Texans are still giving up 9 points. Maybe that's close enough to strike a deal, but for me, as good as those prospects appear to be, I'm not sure I like the idea of spending three of our first four picks on one player.

If it were as simple as a first and third rounder it may be tempting, but it's not going to be that simple at all.

Of course, this is all based on the assumption that one of those three is available at 8. For all we know, Adams could go to Detroit @ 2, Branch could go to Cleveland @ 3, and Anderson could go to Washington @ 6.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revelstoke

Is Butlers value enough to move him with our first to hang on to that third round pick?

No, Butler has virtually no trade value at all. We'll be lucky if we could get a late round pick for him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

While the Rams only received a third round pick from Denver last year when they swapped the #11 and #15 picks, that was only a move of four spots and, more importantly, didn't involve a move into the top 10 spots.

Plus, the value was in St. Louis' benefit for that move. The Rams gave Denver the 11th overall pick (1250) and in return got the 15th overall pick and Denver's third round pick (1050 + 250 = 1300). The Rams were actually getting 50 points of value in the deal, which I imagine is part of the reason why they were willing to accept the offer. In my opinion, they don't agree to that trade if they have to give up 50 points in value instead.

*Country* · #5 (**permalink**) -19-01-2007

To move up to Washington at pick [6] {1600} we would need to trade 1[13] {1150} and 2[77] {450} we could even throw in BUtler as a sweetner.

1[6] Alan Branch

The FA DTs suck and no one in the draft is a come out and start guy except for Branch.

**Nick** · #6 (**permalink**) -19-01-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Country

To move up to Washington at pick [6] {1600} we would need to trade 1[13] {1150} and 2[77] {450} we could even throw in BUtler as a sweetner.

We're still coming up short.

Washington's 1st (1600) - Our first (1150) - Our second (380) = 70 points short

Butler is not going to cover the value of a mid fourth rounder.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Country

The FA DTs suck and no one in the draft is a come out and start guy except for Branch.

Why are you convinced we need a DT that's going to start from day one? We could very well draft a guy and then use him in some kind of rotation with other players.

*Goldenfleece* · #7 (**permalink**) -19-01-2007

I'd entertain the idea but right now Branch is the only one I'd consider doing it for and not if it meant giving up a second round pick. It'd be a possibility if somehow he's still around at say #10. Even then I'm not convinced he'd make an immediate impact. If we're desperate enough for a pass rusher that we'd contemplate trading into the top ten, we might be better served signing one of the proven free agents that will be hitting the market. Besides, good pass rushers can be found in the middle draft like last year's Mark Anderson (4th round, 12 sacks in '06) or Elvis Dumervil (5th round, 8.5 sacks in '06).

*mcpeepants232003* · #8 (**permalink**) -20-01-2007

I am not a big fan of trading up. There is nothing worse than giving up a pick and having the player you trade for not turn out. Plus we have more holes than people are admitting. We need two dts, a de, a lb, a third wr, and offensive line depth. You also can not count on every player improving. Many times players regress.

*snowbozo21* · #9 (**permalink**) -20-01-2007

I agree with the previous post, no way we trade up, we have too many needs to fill and every draft pick should be conserved. Remember we got Setterstrom with our 7th round pick. I believe that Tony Softli will come in and help us evaluate talent even better than last year. I was kind of disappointed with the performance of the tight ends, both of which were first day picks, hopefully they will improve and get more involved in the rams passing game.

Go Rams!

*keith m. klink* · #10 (**permalink**) -31-01-2007

we don't need to trade up, no one had us grabbing tye hill or dropping down, from what i remember on other sites last year NOBODY wanted hill, except me. because he was another small cb. this year everyone loves the kid. we will get quality players that help our team and keep it young and competitive, linehan know's what he is doing, if we trade up to get adams or branch, then the team will see that player as one who is worth it ( see ORLANDO PACE) or drop down for more picks and get the mark andersons , and jerious norwoods and the setterstroms. its only january and we don't know bubkus yet.

*CRAZYHORNS* · #11 (**permalink**) -02-02-2007

I would not trade up especially for that position.

Look at last years draft on the DL. Anyone show superstar qualities? I would avoid giving up anything but a teams selection for this position. We've used up way too many top draft picks and continue to look.

Unless, you know you have the next Reggie White, Randy WHite, Bruce Smith, or Dexter Manly why move up to take the so call best available DL at the draft who will more than likely sit on the bench..........

*RamsFan16* · #12 (**permalink**) -02-02-2007

No, I think we're in a good position to get some talented players, possibly a BPA scenerio if our targets aren't there, or we can always trade down and pick up an Extra pick!

**Nick** · #13 (**permalink**) -02-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by RamsFan16

or we can always trade down and pick up an Extra pick!

You need a partner to move up or down, and they're not always easy to find. So you can't always trade down. Unless you're the Minnesota Vikings, but technically they're not trading down but just waving people by.